In "Chaos Theory," Charlie Savage discusses gaps in election laws that could leave the US open to political chaos in the event of a well-timed terrorist assassination plot. Is it time for lawmakers to confront this issue? Or is it too speculative and dangerous to discuss?
Response pages: 1
ABSOLUTELY-ALL scenarios should have a plan of action and a policy to follow thru. The last thing a terrorist needs to see is the mot powerful country in the world caught like a deer in a car's headlights. There HAS to be some sort of contingency plan-this is America for God's sake. NCN in Somerville
If Kerry were to win and get assinated, let Bush remain president until a special election could take place. If Bush were assinated we already have policy set in place. Sorry no panic necessary!
John , West Melbourne, Fl
One reason that this is not an issue is that, if Bush and Cheney are reelected and assassinated, then the Speaker of the House becomes President automatically. It would seem absurd for Al Qaeda to assassinate their ally John Forbes Kerry or even his vice presidential candidate unless he were to nominate someone like Joe Lieberman as his running mate. I would imagine, however, that the proper thing to do if Kerry were to be elected and then killed off before his term would begin would be for President Bush to declare martial law and continue in office until such time as the assassins were captured or killed and the ensuing nuclear war - voted for nearly unanimously, with Ted Kennedy abstaining - against the perpetrators was over.
Duggan , Austin, Texas
Yes, clearly Al Qaeda's strategy is a political one. The incidents just prior to the Spanish elections show that Al Qaeda's goal is to influence the political course of nations it deems its enemies. Why U.S. politicians don't think Al Qaeda will pursue the same strategies here is beyond me, especially given the apparent success of the scheme in Spain (i.e. convincing that nation to elect the socialist party that promised a Spanish withdrawal from Iraq). Professor Amar's suggestion that the Congress enact legislation enabling a delay of the election seems the most effective, yet least disruptive. I question whether four entire weeks would be necessary, given the vacuum of power that vast delay would create, but nonetheless a brief interim might make the most sense.
L. Schulze., Boston
I think it's sad and extremely unfortunate that that a journalist who has a certain level of power and influence through their words, uses that influence to write articles of this nature. Those who cannot see the idiocy of this type of column are your victims. You know exactly what you were trying to accomplish with this type of article and it's wrong. We are already a nation walking on eggshells and the mere mention of a terrorist act of that magnitude only further damages the rebuilding of this country's confidence. I suspect the only reason this article was written was to gain the writer some noteriety. Shame on you. You are everything that is wrong with journalism in today's society. And please do not retort with any of your 'the public needs to know' and ' we need to explore topics of a sensitive nature' garbage. This article was written with complete self-serving thoughts in mind. Again, shame on you.
Joe , Boston
Response pages: 1